John Yoo Calls for SCOTUS Nominee Who Supports Judicial Restraint

The Wall Street Journal, April 17, 2010 by John Yoo
http://bit.ly/9acSTu (requires registration; go to G:\Law School in the News\News Clips for article)

To satisfy his base, President Obama will have to nominate a justice who is pro-choice, favors racial preferences and likes broad government regulation of the economy. But he also has the flexibility to choose a justice who believes in a return to a restrained judicial role in war and national security. Senate Republicans should support the president’s nominee if he does.

Christopher Hoofnagle and Jennifer King Find Young Adults Value Online Privacy

-San Francisco Chronicle, April 16, 2010 by Benny Evangelista
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/15/BUTM1CVCCA.DTL

“It’s very easy for us to point to certain individuals who have over-shared,” Chris Jay Hoofnagle, one of the study’s lead authors, said in an interview. “The most outrageous, most incorrigible teenagers have become a symbol for all young people. But it’s not an accurate observation of how the average young person is acting.”

-The Daily Californian, April 21, 2010 by Claire Perlman
http://www.dailycal.org/article/109186/young_internet_users_ignorant_of_privacy_laws_stud

King added that young adults rarely understand that, in the case of Facebook, selecting the option to let “everyone” see one’s profile does not mean permission has been granted to everyone on Facebook, but rather everyone who uses the Internet.

“I argue that the tail is wagging the dog: the companies that have the most to gain from describing young people as careless about privacy are encouraging and facilitating that carelessness,” [Hoofnagle] said in the e-mail. “Fundamentally, Google and Facebook are Machiavellian; they are using well-known principles from behavioral economics to encourage revelation of personal data, all the while instituting policies that make it appear as though they are not complicit in its revelation.”

Christopher Hoofnagle Worries about Privacy Threats from Online Advertisers and Facebook

-The New York Times, April 16, 2010 by Stephanie Clifford
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/17/business/media/17coupon.html?scp=4&sq=Berkeley&st=nyt

“There is a feeling that anonymity in this space is kind of dead,” said Chris Jay Hoofnagle, director of the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology’s information privacy programs.

-The Daily Online Examiner, Media Post Blogs, April 16, 2010 by Wendy Davis
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=126329

“Facebook settings don’t seem to be based on any empirical evidence whatsoever,” Hoofnagle tells MediaPost. “They seem to be arbitrary.” What’s more, he adds, the new search-engine friendly settings seem “more controlled by Facebook’s desire to drive traffic than by any norms.”

-ClickZ, April 27, 2010 by Kate Kaye
http://www.clickz.com/3640189

“Facebook is in wealth maximization mode, which should give pause to any user concerned about increasing revelation of personal data,” wrote Hoofnagle in an e-mail to ClickZ News about the site’s recent changes. He went on to suggest that Facebook users “seem to be tiring of the company’s shifting goalposts on information sharing.”

Christopher Edley Notes Clash between Obama and Justice Roberts on Government’s Role

The New York Times, April 16, 2010 by Peter Baker
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/weekinreview/18baker.html

Christopher Edley Jr., an Obama adviser and dean of the law school at the University of California at Berkeley, said it was a shame the two could not have at it one on one. “Televise this chief justice and this president on stage at the Kennedy Center for three hours talking about the role of government and the future of our polity,” Mr. Edley said. “This historic clash of intellectual titans would be the most powerful civics lesson since the Federalist Papers, and we could sure use it.”

Christopher Hoofnagle Finds Young Adults Care about Online Privacy

The New York Times, April 15, 2010 by The Associated Press
http://nyti.ms/cFHnij

”Yes, there are some young people who are posting racy photographs and personal information. But those anecdotes might not represent what the average young person is doing online,” said Chris Hoofnagle, co-author of the study and director of information privacy programs at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology.

Christopher Edley Believes Students Will Accept Tuition Hikes if Given Better Legal Education

U.S. News and World Report, April 15, 2010 by Jessica Rettig
http://bit.ly/afIAfc

Edley says that although tuition is rising swiftly at public law schools—especially in states where public funding has been gradually reduced—students are still willing to incur extra costs for a better education. “[Provided] we demonstrate that the tuition hikes are improving the experience in very apparent ways, from construction to faculty to research, they’re generally quite supportive and excited about our progress,” he says.

Mark Gergen Comments on Constitutionality of Internet Use Tax

CNET News, Politics and Law, April 14, 2010 by Declan McCullagh
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20002434-38.html

Mark Gergen, a tax law professor at the UC Berkeley School of Law, says he’s not aware of any previous cases that would resolve whether a state can “impose an information reporting requirement on a foreign merchant if there is insufficient nexus to require the merchant to collect and remit a use tax.” It’s “difficult to predict how a court would come out on the question,” Gergen says.

Joan Hollinger Criticizes Harsh Utah Ruling in Baby Emma Case

The Washington Post, April 14, 2010 by Jerry Markon
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/13/AR2010041302445.html

Joan Hollinger, a University of California at Berkeley professor and a leading authority on adoption law, called Utah’s decisions in the Baby Emma case “outrageous” because Wyatt filed for custody in Virginia just eight days after Emma’s birth. Utah laws and court decisions, she said, “make it virtually impossible for an out-of-state father to prevent the adoption of an out-of-wedlock child when the mother is determined to go forward.”